I think it would be a very unfortunate decision to include CIs as though this were a business. It is already difficult to attract new CIs to go through the rigors of qualifying and training. Raising fees would be a detriment to the program. I think all of the Confidential Intermediaries who have been hanging in here all these years do it truly as a service. We are obviously in a different category from the other divisions overseen by the CLD. Even though the work of the CIP will continue to dwindle over the years (and we CIs will all age out), it would be a shame for the adoption triad to lose the option of utilizing a Confidential Intermediary. Alice Ernst, Confidential Intermediary since 1998

Increasing the renewal fee by 50% could place an undue burden on the mostly-retired individuals who serve as confidential intermediaries. With the availability of genetic testing and changes in statute, CIs have seen a decrease in case load which makes it more difficult to cover the expenses associated with certification.
Many CIs charge clients only the expenses incurred during a case and do not charge the total number of hours needed to complete a case, instead preferring to donate their time to help clients find answers.
A more modest increase in fees that CIs are charged would be more tolerable and not cause CIs to weigh the pros and cons of renewal.
D. Stubbs, Confidential Intermediary, certified since 1998

A five times increase in the renewal registration fee for Registered Reporting Firms ($50 to $250) is unfair to the court reporters who live and work in Arizona and run a court reporting business while also having to be licensed individually as court reporters.

I believe there should be a much larger initial registration and renewal registration for firms that want to register to do business in Arizona that do not actually have a physical office in Arizona. I run a small business in Yuma, Arizona, and have to maintain my registration as a firm while competing with out-of-state court reporting firms that will register in Arizona even if it's only to be able to provide court reporting services to their client in one case that they have pending in Yuma County.

Out-of-state firms should be paying a larger share of the administration of our program. I believe a much larger initial registration fee for out-of-state firms is appropriate ($500). I believe the renewal period for a registered firm is every five years; so an in-state renewal of $100 and an out-of-state at $250 would seem more reasonable to me.

Looking at the list of registered reporting firms, I see 159 total registered firms and 72 have out-of-state addresses. That is roughly 45 % of our registered firms that are out-of-state. I believe a large portion of the Arizona registered firms are small to medium-sized businesses run by Arizona-licensed court reporters.

Thank you for your consideration.

Michele E. Balmer, RPR, AZ CR # 50489, CA CSR # 14005
Yuma Court Reporters, LLC
Registered Firm # #R1016

It would be a hardship on many reporters to increase the rates for certification and recertification. The rates were just raised a couple of years ago. Our per page rate has remained the same for the official reporters for over 30 years. I would think you should be looking at raising that rate instead of raising our
renewal fees. There is a shortage of Court Reporters in Arizona now. I don't think raising rates is going to help that.

Thank you for your consideration regarding our input pertaining to the proposed change to the ACJA 7-208(K) fee schedule. Desert Financial Credit Union and its actively certified individual LDP certificate holders represent a total of 18 certifications. No less than 3 more teammates will apply for certification and/or sit for the exam during Q1 of 2024. We are a large team (if not the largest) providing access to thousands of Arizonans every year. Our estate planning document preparation division has grown exponentially and will continue to grow in the years ahead.

Relative to changing economic conditions, we understand the need to adjust the fees. However, our years of experience with the submission and processing of dozens of initial and renewal applications is that the processing of these applications results in 9-18 months of delays before Board review from the time the complete application and fingerprints have been submitted. This is contrary to our continuing to grow our team in a manner matching the demand for certified LDP services. May we please request/recommend the Arizona Judicial Council consider tying the increased fees to structured service expectations (i.e. establishment of processing timelines/accountabilities with the goal of timely Board presentation for certification and renewal decisioning)?

Linda Grau, AZCLDP No. 81609
Desert Financial Credit Union, AZCLDP No. 81024